Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Negation help! (without)

universemeuniverseme Yearly Member

Without literacy there can be no general awareness of the injustice in a society.

How do I negate this sentence?
Should I negate 'without' as well?

(me: Without literacy there can be some general awareness of the injustice in a society.)

Comments

  • Chris_Webby_SeoulChris_Webby_Seoul Monthly Member
    edited December 2021 389 karma

    Rewrite: There can be no general awareness of the injustice in a society without literacy

    I believe "no" here is an embedded conditional, so what we have is:

    general awareness of the injustice in a society --> literacy

    There is a lesson on 7Sage CC about embedded conditional.

    Admin Note: https://7sage.com/lesson/mastery-embedded-conditional/
    https://7sage.com/lesson/mastery-embedded-conditional-proof/

  • canihazJDcanihazJD Alum Member Sage
    edited December 2021 7907 karma

    @universeme said:

    Without literacy there can be no general awareness of the injustice in a society.

    How do I negate this sentence?
    Should I negate 'without' as well?

    (me: Without literacy there can be some general awareness of the injustice in a society.)

    I think what you have is fine. A few ways to attack this:

    Here's what happened in my head just now...

    Without literacy there can be no general awareness of the injustice in a society.

    or...

    if you dont have literacy you can't have awareness

    (it is not the case that) if you dont have literacy you can't have awareness

    You can not have literacy and still have awareness

    or...

    literacyawareness

    negated: literacy ←some→ awareness

  • Pretzel LogicPretzel Logic Monthly Member
    226 karma

    I personally like seeing a "Blah blah Group 4 blah blah Group 3", because the two indicators just cancel themselves out. Your mind will begin to pick this up very fast.

    "ThingA cannot/won't/is not blah blah without ThingB"
    Therefore, Thing A -> Thing B

    How about: "Without Thing A, Thing B cannot blah blah blah"
    Not Thing A -> Not Thing B
    Therefore Thing B -> Thing A

    (If I made a mistake please lmk!)

  • j-roccccsj-roccccs Monthly Member
    26 karma

    When you see "without", "until", "except" or "unless" what follows becomes the necessary condition and then you negate the remaining term and it becomes the sufficient.
    Thus... GAIS ----> L

  • WinningHereWinningHere Monthly Member
    365 karma

    @j-roccccs as simple as that.

Sign In or Register to comment.